From: Like Xu <like.xu@linux.intel.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Cc: Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@intel.com>,
Jim Mattson <jmattson@google.com>,
Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@tencent.com>,
Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com>, Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com>,
kan.liang@intel.com, wei.w.wang@intel.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH v4 4/6] KVM: x86/vPMU: Introduce a new kvm_pmu_ops->msr_idx_to_pmc callback
Date: Sun, 27 Oct 2019 18:52:41 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20191027105243.34339-5-like.xu@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20191027105243.34339-1-like.xu@linux.intel.com>
Introduce a new callback msr_idx_to_pmc that returns a struct kvm_pmc*,
and change kvm_pmu_is_valid_msr to return ".msr_idx_to_pmc(vcpu, msr) ||
.is_valid_msr(vcpu, msr)" and AMD just returns false from .is_valid_msr.
Suggested-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Reported-by: kbuild test robot <lkp@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Like Xu <like.xu@linux.intel.com>
---
arch/x86/kvm/pmu.c | 3 ++-
arch/x86/kvm/pmu.h | 1 +
arch/x86/kvm/pmu_amd.c | 15 +++++++++++----
arch/x86/kvm/vmx/pmu_intel.c | 13 +++++++++++++
4 files changed, 27 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/pmu.c b/arch/x86/kvm/pmu.c
index 1d3252d4f9d4..2674a6659ba4 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kvm/pmu.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kvm/pmu.c
@@ -339,7 +339,8 @@ void kvm_pmu_deliver_pmi(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
bool kvm_pmu_is_valid_msr(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u32 msr)
{
- return kvm_x86_ops->pmu_ops->is_valid_msr(vcpu, msr);
+ return kvm_x86_ops->pmu_ops->msr_idx_to_pmc(vcpu, msr) ||
+ kvm_x86_ops->pmu_ops->is_valid_msr(vcpu, msr);
}
int kvm_pmu_get_msr(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u32 msr, u64 *data)
diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/pmu.h b/arch/x86/kvm/pmu.h
index c4a80fe285a5..b253dd5e56cf 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kvm/pmu.h
+++ b/arch/x86/kvm/pmu.h
@@ -27,6 +27,7 @@ struct kvm_pmu_ops {
struct kvm_pmc *(*pmc_idx_to_pmc)(struct kvm_pmu *pmu, int pmc_idx);
struct kvm_pmc *(*rdpmc_ecx_to_pmc)(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
unsigned int idx, u64 *mask);
+ struct kvm_pmc *(*msr_idx_to_pmc)(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u32 msr);
int (*is_valid_rdpmc_ecx)(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, unsigned int idx);
bool (*is_valid_msr)(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u32 msr);
int (*get_msr)(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u32 msr, u64 *data);
diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/pmu_amd.c b/arch/x86/kvm/pmu_amd.c
index a4a6d8a09f70..8e7372e10251 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kvm/pmu_amd.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kvm/pmu_amd.c
@@ -199,14 +199,20 @@ static struct kvm_pmc *amd_rdpmc_ecx_to_pmc(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
}
static bool amd_is_valid_msr(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u32 msr)
+{
+ /* please use kvm_pmu_is_valid_msr() instead */
+ return false;
+}
+
+static struct kvm_pmc *amd_msr_idx_to_pmc(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u32 msr)
{
struct kvm_pmu *pmu = vcpu_to_pmu(vcpu);
- int ret = false;
+ struct kvm_pmc *pmc;
- ret = get_gp_pmc_amd(pmu, msr, PMU_TYPE_COUNTER) ||
- get_gp_pmc_amd(pmu, msr, PMU_TYPE_EVNTSEL);
+ pmc = get_gp_pmc_amd(pmu, msr, PMU_TYPE_COUNTER);
+ pmc = pmc ? pmc : get_gp_pmc_amd(pmu, msr, PMU_TYPE_EVNTSEL);
- return ret;
+ return pmc;
}
static int amd_pmu_get_msr(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u32 msr, u64 *data)
@@ -308,6 +314,7 @@ struct kvm_pmu_ops amd_pmu_ops = {
.pmc_is_enabled = amd_pmc_is_enabled,
.pmc_idx_to_pmc = amd_pmc_idx_to_pmc,
.rdpmc_ecx_to_pmc = amd_rdpmc_ecx_to_pmc,
+ .msr_idx_to_pmc = amd_msr_idx_to_pmc,
.is_valid_rdpmc_ecx = amd_is_valid_rdpmc_ecx,
.is_valid_msr = amd_is_valid_msr,
.get_msr = amd_pmu_get_msr,
diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/pmu_intel.c b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/pmu_intel.c
index 7a8067ec19bb..dcde142327ca 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/pmu_intel.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/pmu_intel.c
@@ -162,6 +162,18 @@ static bool intel_is_valid_msr(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u32 msr)
return ret;
}
+static struct kvm_pmc *intel_msr_idx_to_pmc(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u32 msr)
+{
+ struct kvm_pmu *pmu = vcpu_to_pmu(vcpu);
+ struct kvm_pmc *pmc;
+
+ pmc = get_fixed_pmc(pmu, msr);
+ pmc = pmc ? pmc : get_gp_pmc(pmu, msr, MSR_P6_EVNTSEL0);
+ pmc = pmc ? pmc : get_gp_pmc(pmu, msr, MSR_IA32_PERFCTR0);
+
+ return pmc;
+}
+
static int intel_pmu_get_msr(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u32 msr, u64 *data)
{
struct kvm_pmu *pmu = vcpu_to_pmu(vcpu);
@@ -367,6 +379,7 @@ struct kvm_pmu_ops intel_pmu_ops = {
.pmc_is_enabled = intel_pmc_is_enabled,
.pmc_idx_to_pmc = intel_pmc_idx_to_pmc,
.rdpmc_ecx_to_pmc = intel_rdpmc_ecx_to_pmc,
+ .msr_idx_to_pmc = intel_msr_idx_to_pmc,
.is_valid_rdpmc_ecx = intel_is_valid_rdpmc_ecx,
.is_valid_msr = intel_is_valid_msr,
.get_msr = intel_pmu_get_msr,
--
2.21.0
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-10-28 2:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-10-27 10:52 [PATCH v4 0/6] KVM: x86/vPMU: Efficiency optimization by reusing last created perf_event Like Xu
2019-10-27 10:52 ` [PATCH v4 1/6] perf/core: Provide a kernel-internal interface to recalibrate event period Like Xu
2019-10-27 10:52 ` [PATCH v4 2/6] perf/core: Provide a kernel-internal interface to pause perf_event Like Xu
2019-10-27 10:52 ` [PATCH v4 3/6] KVM: x86/vPMU: Rename pmu_ops callbacks from msr_idx to rdpmc_ecx Like Xu
2019-10-27 10:52 ` Like Xu [this message]
2019-10-27 10:52 ` [PATCH v4 5/6] KVM: x86/vPMU: Reuse perf_event to avoid unnecessary pmc_reprogram_counter Like Xu
2019-11-14 3:51 ` Wanpeng Li
2019-11-14 7:13 ` Like Xu
2019-10-27 10:52 ` [PATCH v4 6/6] KVM: x86/vPMU: Add lazy mechanism to release perf_event per vPMC Like Xu
2019-10-28 16:43 ` [PATCH v4 0/6] KVM: x86/vPMU: Efficiency optimization by reusing last created perf_event Peter Zijlstra
2019-11-12 6:08 ` Like Xu
2019-11-12 10:05 ` Paolo Bonzini
2019-11-12 10:09 ` Paolo Bonzini
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20191027105243.34339-5-like.xu@linux.intel.com \
--to=like.xu@linux.intel.com \
--cc=acme@kernel.org \
--cc=alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=jmattson@google.com \
--cc=jolsa@redhat.com \
--cc=joro@8bytes.org \
--cc=kan.liang@intel.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=namhyung@kernel.org \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=sean.j.christopherson@intel.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=vkuznets@redhat.com \
--cc=wanpengli@tencent.com \
--cc=wei.w.wang@intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox